Georgia County Government - February 2008 - (Page 33)

the Superior Court, to hear littering and illegal dumping violations. The team also developed a litter prevention campaign (“Litter. It Costs You.”) that was unveiled at the governor’s Litter Summit in August 2006. The campaign includes education, enforcement and eradication (cleanup) tools and strategies for local governments to use, identifies a reporting and tracking metric to monitor the effectiveness of state and local litter prevention efforts and identifies local and state resources devoted to litter and illegal dumping prevention. Additional information about this comprehensive litter prevention effort can be found at www.litteritcostsyou.org. Changing National Solid Waste Management Policies While these changes were occurring in Georgia, additional steps were being taken at the national level. Congress amended the solid waste law in 1976 with the passage of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The major change associated with RCRA was to require that hazardous waste, primarily industrial chemical waste, be separated from the solid waste stream and handled under much more stringent federal standards set up specifically for hazardous waste. A federal permit system was established to require that hazardous waste be managed properly. This was a major improvement since hazardous waste had historically been discarded in open dumps or the newer sanitary landfills. (Hazardous waste will be discussed in more detail in a separate article.) Unfortunately, however, the passage of RCRA did not address all solid waste problems. As a result, in 1984 Congress amended the law to require the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to develop environmentally protective landfill standards. These “Subtitle D” rules were released in draft form by USEPA in 1989 and in final form in 1991. The new rules require that landfills be constructed according to national standards designed to minimize and detect ground and surface water contamination. Landfills are required to have a composite liner system made of layers of low-permeability soil and thick plastic, leachate collection, groundwater monitoring and methane collection systems. In addition, landfill owners/operators are required to have a plan and financial assurance for closing the landfill and providing post-closure care for 30 years. Subtitle D landfills that leak are required to implement corrective action. These Subtitle D rules sent a twofold message: 1) new MSW landfills would be more environmentally protective; and 2) the cost of landfilling waste would increase. After adoption of the federal Subtitle D minimum standards for landfills, the federal government has left most solid waste management decisions with state and local governments. Besides the Subtitle D standards and new air quality and ash management standards for waste incinerators, the only other significant federal action relating to solid waste was the creation of a hierarchy of waste management options released as guidance in 1988. The hierarchy identified source reduction (including reuse of materials) as the most preferred method, followed in order by recycling (including composting), waste incineration (with energy recovery), and landfilling. Since this hierarchy was released before new requirements were placed on MSW incinerators, concern focused on incineration being a more preferred method for disposal than landfilling. Due to air-quality and incinerator ash concerns, USEPA later changed the hierarchy to indicate that landfilling and incineration were at the same level in the hierarchy. In an effort to focus more on resource management and waste reduction, the USEPA in 2006 launched the Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC), a national effort to conserve natural resources and energy by managing materials more efficiently. Under this program, USEPA is working with states, industry, businesses and others to find smarter, faster ways to accomplish RCC goals. The goals of the RCC are to: • prevent pollution and promote reuse and recycling; • reduce priority and toxic chemicals in products and waste; and • conserve energy and materials. ■ Editor’s note: This article will continue next month with the Georgia Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Act, its implementation and scrap tires and the Solid Waste Trust Fund. A third installment in April will look at current solid waste management trends in the state, regional programs and emerging challenges. For More Information For additional information, go to http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/ osw/conserve/basic.htm. 358640_G_Ben.indd 1 FEBRUARY 2008 www.accg.org 12/18/07 33 9:15:34 PM http://www.litteritcostsyou.org http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/basic.htm http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/basic.htm http://www.gbtengineers.com http://www.accg.org

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Georgia County Government - February 2008

Georgia County Government - February 2008 Contents President's Message County Matters Regional Focus on the Georgia Mountains: Rabun, Habersham and Stephens Counties DNR Commissioner Noel Holcomb Solid Waste Management in Georgia: New Challenges Ahead Essential Elements of Negotiating Professional Service Firm Contracts The Walker County Courthouse at LaFayette Extension News: Partnerships are Key to Conservation Education Research Corner: Interns: An Asset to Every County NACo News: Counties and Climate Change FAQs Georgia Flag to Travel to All 159 Georgia Counties State Announces Regional Recycling Hub Grant Awards Abraham Joins ACCG Support Staff County Parade ACCG Launches e-Magazine Index of Advertisers

Georgia County Government - February 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.